BuzzerBeater Forums

This rule is not about trust.
Its about protecting people from thieves.

So then this rule wouldn't protect us (ordinary users) from NT/U21 coaches who are thieves ;-)
So this rule isn't needed if it protect us from one type of thief but at the same time open possibility for another type of thief ;-)

It wouldn't benefit me in anyway

It isn't 100% truth. One of Japan U21 player is Your player. So Your merchendise increases. Maybe Your player plays in U21 instead of discussed player ;-)

BTW the buyer of the player DID email me to ask

Still You don't understand that rules should be created to general case, not to specific case.
Maybe he doesn't trust You ;-) I think many people could consider that You spend to many time to complain current rules, engine, etc on forum instead of to try to exploit current rules and therefore You knowledge about U21 isn't as good as it could be ;-) He has right to think that You made wrong decision ;-)

I know why this discussion is so hard. Because it is discussion between two users, and one of us has better knowledge about NT/U21 than 2nd of us ;-) If You know what I mean ;-)

Okey. It looks like You still can't understand. So last try. I explain You my plan.
1. I'm going to win elections - currently I think Japan should be good country for me, maybe even Japan U21, but it doesnt matter ;-)
2. Then I'm going to say that one player has no chance to play in my NT/U21.
3. And then, after few days, maybe weeks I'm going to change my opinion and I'm going to call this player and set him in NT/U21 match.

Please note, that all my steps described above are 100% legal. And they aren't immoral because opinion always could be changed. For example because of 6 the best player could be injured or in bad gameshape, etc. Maybe this plan is only perfidious, a little, but it is still legal ;-)

And it will be enough proof that You idea is bad ;-) Because it will show, that in this way, thanks Your idea, it is possible to penalize innocent users ;-)

I understand that You aren't happy when You see these advertisements. But You solution described in this topic is bad. You should try to find better solution. If it would be good - I would support it ;-)

Still You don't understand simple things. Future can NOT be fact ;-) Only past ;-)

He has never played match in NT before / he played few matches in NT - these sentences ARE facts.

He has no chance to play in NT in future / he has chance to play in NT in future - these sentences are NOT facts, they are only opinions, assumption ;-)

Penalty for opinions is crazy. I don't know how it works in Japan but in whole civilized world nobody can be penalized because of his opinions.